Art 11-Consti FULL Cases

8/11/2019 Art 11-Consti FULL Cases

1/110

MACEDA VS.VASQUEZ

221 SCRA 464

Date of Promulgation: April 22, 1993

Ponente: Nocon, J.

Keywords:administrative power;falsiation of ertiate of servie;administrative and

riminal lia!ility; separation of powers; o"e of t#e om!udsman

$ui%&uide: '#ere a riminal omplaint against a (udge or ot#er ourt employee arises from

t#eir administrative duties, t#e )m!udsman must defer ation on said omplaint and refer it

to t#e *upreme +ourt for determination w#et#er said (udge or ourt employee #ad ated

wit#in t#e sope of t#eir administrative duties

-ats:

. Petitioner /0onifaio*anaeda, Presiding (udge of 0ran# 12 of t#e 4+ of Anti5ue6

seeks the review of the following orders of the Oce of the Om!dsm"n:

/16 4#e )rder dated *eptem!er 17, 1991 denying t#e e8.parte motion to refer to t#e

*upreme +ourt /*+6 led !y petitioner; and

/26 4#e )rder dated ovem!er 22, 1991 denying petitioners motion for

reonsideration and direting petitioner to le #is ounter.a"davit and ot#er

ontroverting evidenes

. #es$ondent%s&'"$oleon A. Aier" of the (!lic Attorne)*s Oce+

"lleg"tions,

/16Petitioner falsied #is +ertiate of *ervie dated -e!ruary , 1979, !y ertifying

"that all civil and criminal cases which have been submitted or decision or

determination or a !eriod o # da$s have been determined and decidedon or beore

Januar$ %1, 1&,"w#en petitioner %new t#at no deision #ad !een rendered in < ivil

and 1= riminal ases t#at #ave !een su!mitted for deision

/26Petitioner similarly falsied #is ertiates of servie for t#e mont#s of -e!ruary

and April to August of 1979; and t#ose from (anuary to *eptem!er 199=

. (etitioner%s "rg!ments,

/16 >e #ad !een granted !y t#e *+ an e8tension of 9= days to deide t#e

aforementioned ases

/264#e )m!udsman #as no ?urisdition over said ase despite t#e *+@s ruling in 'ra!vs. Sandi(anba$an, sine t#e oense #arged arose from t#e ?udges performane of

#is o"ial duties, w#i# is under t#e ontrol and supervision of t#e *+

/364#e investigation of t#e )m!udsman onstitutes an enroa#ment into t#e *+s

onstitutional duty of supervision over all inferior ourts

BssueCs:


2/110

/16 'C t#e )"e of t#e )m!udsman ould entertain a riminal omplaint for t#e

alleged falsiation of a ?udges ertiation su!mitted to t#e *+

/26 Bf it an /wit# regard to Bssue 16, wCn a referral s#ould !e made rst to t#e *+

uling:

. 4#e instant petition is granted

. 4#e *+ direted t#e )m!udsman to dismiss t#e omplaint and to refer it to t#e *+ for

appropriate ation

atio:

&-+ ss!e -, /ES.

. 4#ere is not#ing in t#e deision in 'ra!t#at would restrit it only to oenses

ommitted !y a ?udge unrelated to #is o"ial duties

. A ?udge w#o falsies #is ertiate of servie is:

/16 "dministr"tivel) li"leto the SCfor serious misondut and ine"ieny under

*etion 1, ule 1= of t#e ules of +ourt, and

/26 crimin"ll) li"le to the St"teunder t#e evised Penal +ode for #is felonious

at

&0+ ss!e 0, /ES.

. #eferr"l to the SCo 4#e )m!udsman s#ould rst refer t#e matter of petitioners ertiates of

servie to t#e *+ for determination of w#et#er said ertiates reEeted t#e

true status of #is pending ase load, as t#e +ourt #as t#e neessary reords to

ma%e su# a determination

o 4#e )m!udsman annot ompel t#e *+, as one of t#e t#ree !ran#es of

government, to su!mit its reords, or to allow its personnel to testify on t#ematter

. Administr"tive (owero Article VIII, section 6 of the 1987 Constitutione8lusively vests in t#e *+

administrative supervision over all ourts and ourt personnel, from t#e

Presiding (ustie of t#e +ourt of Appeals down to t#e lowest muniipal trial

ourt ler%

o 0y virtue of t#e +ourt@s administrative power, it is only t#e *+ t#at an

oversee t#e ?udges and ourt personnels ompliane wit# all laws, and ta%e

t#e proper administrative ation against t#em if t#ey ommit any violation

. Se$"r"tion of (owerso Bn t#e a!sene of any administrative ation ta%en against petitioner !y t#e *+

wit# regard to #is ertiates of servie, t#e investigation !eing onduted !y

t#e )m!udsman enroa#es into t#e +ourts power of administrative

supervision over all ourts and its personnel, in violation of t#e dotrine of

separation of powers


3/110

o o ot#er !ran# of government may intrude into t#e +ourt@s administrative

power, wit#out running afoul of t#e dotrine of separation of powers

. Om!dsm"n%s 1!sti2c"tiono 4#e )m!udsman annot ?ustify its investigation of petitioner on t#e powers

granted to it !y Article XI, section 13 (1) and (2) of the 1987

Constitution, for su# a ?ustiation not only runs ounter to t#e speimandate of t#e +onstitution granting supervisory powers to t#e *+ over all

ourts and t#eir personnel, !ut li%ewise undermines t#e independene of t#e

?udiiary

. #"tion"le for SC #eferr"lo Administratively, t#e 5uestion !efore t#e +ourt is: Should a )ud(e, havin(

been (ranted b$ this Court an e*tension o time to decide cases beore him,

re!ort these cases in his certi+cate o service

o As t#e aforementioned 5uestion #ad not yet !een raised and resolved !y t#e

*+, it is 5uestiona!le #ow t#e )m!udsman ould resolve t#e riminal

omplaint t#at re5uires t#e resolution of t#e aforementioned 5uestion

&regorio >onasan BB petitioner vs

4#e Panel of Bnvestigating Proseutors

)f t#e Department of (ustie

&o 1


4/110

ris% t#eir lives to a#ieve t#e ational eovery Agenda /A6 of *enator >onasan w#i# t#ey !elieve

is t#e only program t#at would solve t#e ills of soiety

*worn statement of A-P a?or Perfeto agil stated t#at:

o(une , 2==3 a!out 11 pm: *enator &regorio J&ringo >onasan arrived wit# +apt 4uringa to #old t#e

P meeting w#ere t#ey onluded t#e use of fore, violene and armed struggle to a#ieve t#e visionof P w#ere a ?unta will !e onstituted w#i# will run t#e new government 4#ey #ad a !lood ompat

and t#at #e only partiipated due to t#e t#reat made !y *enator >onasan w#en #e said JKung %aya

nating pumatay sa ating mga %ala!an, %aya din nating pumatay sa mga %asama#ang magtata%sil

o(uly 2F, 2==3: >e saw on 4L t#at Gieutenant Antonio 4rillanes, +aptain &erardo &am!ala, +aptain

Ale?ano and some ot#ers w#o were present during t#e P meeting #e attended, #aving a press

onferene a!out t#eir oupation of t#e )a%wood >otel >e saw t#at t#e letter MBM on t#e arm !ands

and t#e !anner is t#e same letter MBM in t#e !anner is t#e same as t#eir !lood ompat wound

August 2F, 2==3: *enator >onasan appeared wit# ounsel at t#e D)( to le a a otion for +lariation

5uestioning D)(s ?urisdition over t#e ase sine t#e imputed ats were ommitted in relation to #is

pu!li o"e !y a group of pu!li o"ials wit# *alary &rade 31 w#i# s#ould !e #andled !y t#e )"e

of t#e )m!udsman and t#e *andigan!ayan

*enator >onasan t#en led a petition for ertiorari under ule < of t#e ules of +ourt against t#e D)(

Panel and its mem!ers, +BD&.PP.PCDiretor Iduardo atillano and )m!udsman *imeon L arelo,

attri!uting grave a!use of disretion on t#e part of t#e D)( Panel in issuing t#e afore5uoted )rder of

*eptem!er 1=, 2==3 direting #im to le #is respetive ounter.a"davits and ontroverting evidene

on t#e ground t#at t#e D)( #as no ?urisdition to ondut t#e preliminary investigation

Bssues:

1 '#et#er in regards to )m!udsman.D)( +irular no 9ig#er6 t#ere!y falling wit#in t#e

?urisdition of t#e *andigan 0ayan

>eld: '#erefore, t#e petition for ertiorari is DB*B**ID for la% of merit

1 o

)m!udsman ases involving riminal oenses may !e su!divided into two lasses, to wit: /16

t#ose ognia!le !y t#e *andigan!ayan, and /26 t#ose falling under t#e ?urisdition of t#e regular

ourts 4#e dierene !etween t#e two, aside from t#e ategory of t#e ourts w#erein t#ey are

led, is on t#e aut#ority to investigate as distinguis#ed from t#e aut#ority to proseute

4#e power to investigate or ondut a preliminary investigation on any )m!udsman ase may

!e e8erised !y an investigator or proseutor of t#e )"e of t#e )m!udsman, or !y any Provinial

or +ity Proseutor or t#eir assistane, eit#er in t#eir regular apaities or as deputied

)m!udsmanproseutors

irular supports t#e view of t#e respondent )m!udsman t#at it is ?ust an internal agreement

!etween t#e )m!udsman and t#e D)(

4#e +onstitution, 4#e )m!udsman At of 1979, Administrative order no 7 of t#e o"e of t#e

)m!udsman 4#e prevailing ?urisprudene and under t#e evised ules on +riminal Proedure, All


5/110

reognie and up#old t#e onurrent ?urisdition of t#e )m!udsman and t#e D)( to ondut

preliminary investigation on #arges led against pu!li o"ers and employees

4#e D)( Panel need not !e aut#oried nor deputied !y t#e )m!udsman to ondut t#e

preliminary investigation for omplaints led wit# it !eause t#e D)(s aut#ority to at as t#e

prinipal law ageny of t#e government and investigate t#e ommission of rimes under t#e

evised Penal +ode is derived from t#e evised Administrative +ode w#i# #ad !een #eld in t#eatividad ase13 as not !eing ontrary to t#e +onstitution 4#us, t#ere is not even a need to

delegate t#e ondut of t#e preliminary investigation to an ageny w#i# #as t#e ?urisdition to do

so in t#e rst plae >owever, t#e )m!udsman may assert its primary ?urisdition at any stage of

t#e investigation

2 o

Bn t#e ase of People vs $ue Po Gay, 9 P#il = /19


6/110

%n &anuary ', '*, an information was filed by the PCGG Chairman, $ateo Caparas, with the Sandiganbayancharging petitioner +oman Cru, &r. and certain other individuals as follows-

That on or about $ay ', '*/, in $etro $anila, Philippines, and within the 0urisdiction of this1onorable Court, the said accused, being then the President and General $anager and the 2icePresident and Treasurer, respectively of the Government Service 3nsurance System (GS3S), agovernment financial institution, conspiring and confederating together and with others who will be

charged separately, did then and there, in the discharge of their official administrative functions,willfully, 4nowingly and unlawfully and contrary to Central 5an4 +ules and +egulations, enter into acontract with Cor!sia, a private corporation, whereby GS3S, under the terms and conditionsmanifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the GS3S, sold, transferred and conveyed to said Cor!

sia seven percent (67) 8!year Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) bonds with a total facevalue of #9#2#: $3993%: "%;+ 1;:


7/110

very first instance, the PCGG did not have the FliteralF 0ustification to even entertain the matterunder its enabling enactments. The parties agree that the issue, therefore, to be presented beforethe Court is whether or not the complaint, and the affidavits in support of that complaint, wouldsustain the proposition, assuming that these affidavits are duly substantiated, that the crimecharged in the present 3nformation is Fcrony related crimeF for which the PCGG has adeEuateauthority to investigate and to file an 3nformation on the very first instance. The Court will not loo4into the correctness of the determination of probable cause, that matter being which the eDclusive

realm of the investigating office and 0urisdiction is conceded to it.+

n opposition to petitioners motion was filed by respondent PCGG to which petitioner filed a reply.

%n ugust 6, ' respondent court issued a resolution denying the motion to Euash. motion for reconsiderationfiled by petitioner was denied by the respondent court on $ay ', '.

1ence, this petition which is predicated on the following grounds-

>3T1 T1# #""#CT323T= %" T1# '*6 C%:ST3T;T3%:, +#SP%:#+# :;99 :ho too4 undue advantage of their public office and@or used their power, authority, influence, connections orrelationship.

reading of the information and the amended information that was filed by the PCGG in this case shows thatpetitioner is charged with a violation of +epublic ct :o. /' as amended, the nti!Graft and Corrupt Practices ct.3t is alleged that petitioner, as president and general manager of the GS3S, allegedly entered into a contract of salewith Cor!sia, a private corporation, manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the GS3S, of seven percent (67) ofthe 8!year Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) bonds with a total face value of #9#2#: $3993%: "%;+1;:


10/110

thereafter at twelve percent ('87) discount only, to the damage and pre0udice of the Philippine government in thesum of T1+## $3993%: T>% 1;:#92# T1%;S:< P#S%S (P/,8'8,.).

The amended information that was thereafter filed against petitioner contained substantially the same allegations withthe only amendment that petitioner was identified as Fa subordinate and crony@associate of former President"erdinand #. $arcos,F and with the additional allegation of Fta4ing undue advantage of his public office and by usinghis relationship to said former President "erdinand #. $arcos, . . . .F There is no allegation that, President $arcos, his

immediate family, relatives, subordinate or close associate, as petitioner, thereby acEuired ill!gotten wealth. 3n fact allthat the information and its amendment allege is that damage was thereby caused to the Philippine government."rom its allegation it also appears that it was Cor!sia which gained or profited by this transaction not petitioner.

ConseEuently, the amended information that was filed against petitioner does not fall under the category of criminalactions for recovery of ill!gotten wealth filed against a member of the family of President $arcos, relatives,subordinates or close associates, who too4 undue advantage of their office or authority as contemplated underSection 8(a) of #Decutive %rder :o. '.

>hat the petitioner is actually charged with is for a violation of +epublic ct :o. /'. Public respondent PCGG doesnot pretend that the President assigned to it this particular case against the petitioner for investigation andprosecution in accordance with Section 8(b) of #Decutive %rder :o. '.

$oreover, an eDamination of the complaint filed with respondent PCGG, as well as the affidavits, counter!affidavitsand eDhibits submitted at the preliminary investigation show that there is no evidence at all that this alleged violationis crony related, committed by petitioner by ta4ing advantage of his public office, and was committed in relation with

the ill!gotten wealth being sought to be recovered aforestated. 1There is, therefore, no evidence in the hands ofthe respondent PCGG to 0ustify the amendment of the information.

3ndeed, the said amendment appears to be an afterthought to ma4e it fall under the type of offenses respondentPCGG may investigate and prosecute under the law. 3t is a fundamental principle that when on its face theinformation is null and void for lac4 of authority to file the same, it cannot be cured nor resurrected by an

amendment. 11nother preliminary investigation must be underta4en and thereafter, based on evidenceadduced, a new information should be filed. 12

ConseEuently all the actions respondent PCGG had ta4en in this case including the filing of the information andamended information with the respondent court should be struc4 down.

>1#+#"%+#, the petition is G+:T#< and the Euestioned resolutions of the respondent court dated ugust 6,'* and $ay ', ' are hereby +#2#+S#< :< S#T S3


11/110

J Petitioner also contends that the %mbudsman has no 0urisdiction over said cases despite this Courts ruling in%rap vs. Sandiganbayan, since the offense charged arose from the 0udges performance of his official duties, which isunder the control and supervision of the Supreme Court . . . The Court disagrees with the first part of petitionersbasic argument. There is nothing in the decision in %rap that would restrict it only to offenses committed by a 0udgeunrelated to his official duties. 0udge who falsifies his certificate of service is administratively liable to the SupremeCourt for serious misconduct and inefficiency under Section ', +ule 'A of the +ules of Court, and criminally liable tothe State under the +evised Penal Code for his felonious act.

8. 3


12/110

the control and supervision of the Supreme Court. "urthermore, the investigation of the %mbudsman constitutes anencroachment into the Supreme Courts constitutional duty of supervision over all inferior courts.

The Court disagrees with the first Part of petitioners basic argument. There is nothing in the decision in %rap thatwould restrict it only to offenses committed by a 0udge unrelated to his official duties. 0udge who falsifies hiscertificate of service is administratively liable to the Supreme Court for serious misconduct and inefficiency underSection ', +ule 'A of the +ules of Court, and criminally liable to the State under the +evised Penal Code for his

felonious act.

1owever, >e agree with petitioner that in the absence of any administrative action ta4en against him by this Courtwith regard to his certificates of service, the investigation being conducted by the %mbudsman encroaches into theCourts power of administrative supervision over all courts and its personnel, in violation of the doctrine of separationof powers.

rticle 2333, section of the '*6 Constitution eDclusively vests in the Supreme Court administrative supervision overall courts and court personnel, from the Presiding &ustice of the Court of ppeals down to the lowest municipal trialcourt cler4. 5y virtue of this power, it is only the Supreme Court that can oversee the 0udges and court personnelscompliance with all laws, and ta4e the proper administrative action against them if they commit any violation thereof.:o other branch of government may intrude into this power, without running afoul of the doctrine of separation ofpowers.

The %mbudsman cannot 0ustify its investigation of petitioner on the powers granted to it by the Constitution, / forsuch a 0ustification not only runs counter to the specific mandate of the Constitution granting supervisory powers tothe Supreme Court over all courts and their personnel, but li4ewise undermines the independence of the 0udiciary.

Thus, the %mbudsman should first refer the matter of petitioners certificates of service to this Court for determinationof whether said certificates reflected the true status of his pending case load, as the Court has the necessary recordsto ma4e such a determination. The %mbudsman cannot compel this Court, as one of the three branches ofgovernment, to submit its records, or to allow its personnel to testify on this matter, as suggested by publicrespondent biera in his affidavit!complaint. A

The rationale for the foregoing pronouncement is evident in this case. dministratively. the Euestion before ;s is this-should a 0udge, having been granted by this Court an eDtension of time to decide cases before him, report thesecases in his certificate of serviceL s this Euestion had not yet been raised with, much less resolved by, this Court.how could the %mbudsman resolve the present criminal complaint that reEuires the resolution of said EuestionL

3n fine, where a criminal complaint against a &udge or other court employee arises from their administrative duties,the %mbudsman must defer action on said complaint and refer the same to this Court for determination whether said&udge or court employee had acted within the scope of their administrative duties.

>1#+#"%+#, the instant petition is hereby G+:T#


13/110

The case is a petition for certiorariM'Nassailing the 0urisdiction of the%mbudsman and the Sandiganbayan to ta4e cogniance of two criminalcasesM8Nagainst petitioner and his wife 9iwayway S. Tan, contending that he isnot a public officer within the 0urisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. M/N

%n September ', '8, the Special Prosecutor, %ffice of the%mbudsman, with the approval of the %mbudsman, filed with theSandiganbayan two informations against petitioner and 9iwayway S. Tancharging them with estafa through falsification of official documents (CriminalCase :o. '*88) and frustrated estafa through falsification of mercantiledocuments (Criminal Case :o. '8*), as follows-

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 18022

That on or about the 15th day of Marh! 1"8" and for #o$et%$e &r%or or #ub#e'uent

thereto! %n the Mun%%&a(%ty of Manda(uyon)! Metro Man%(a! and *%th%n the+ur%#d%t%on of th%# ,onorab(e Court! the abo-ena$ed au#ed! /ELICITO S.MACALINO! be%n) then the A##%#tant Mana)er of the Trea#ury %-%#%on and the,ead of the Loan# Ad$%n%#trat%on In#urane Set%on of the h%(%&&%ne Nat%ona(Con#trut%on Cor&orat%on 3NCC4! a )o-ern$entontro((ed or&orat%on *%th off%e#at ESA orner Re(%ane St.! Manda(uyon)! and hene! a &ub(% off%er! *h%(e %n the

&erfor$ane of h%# off%%a( funt%on#! ta%n) ad-anta)e of h%# &o#%t%on! o$$%tt%n) theoffen#e %n re(at%on to h%# off%e and on#&%r%n) and onfederat%n) *%th h%# #&ou#eLI6A76A7 S. TAN! be%n) then the o*ner of 6aer Maret%n)! d%d then and there*%((fu((y! un(a*fu((y! fe(on%ou#(y and by $ean# of dee%t defraud the h%(%&&%ne

Nat%ona( Con#trut%on Cor&orat%on %n the fo((o*%n) $anner %n &re&ar%n) thea&&(%at%on *%th the h%(%&&%ne Nat%ona( 9an! 9uend%a 9ranh for the %##uane of ade$and draft %n the a$ount of NINE ,:NRE EI;,T7 T,REE T,O:SANSI< ,:NRE EI;,T7T6O 11=100 ESOS 3"8>!?82.114! h%(%&&%neCurreny! %n fa-or of 9aner# Tru#t Co$&any! au#ed /ELICITO S.MACALINO#u&er%$&o#ed the na$e 6aer Maret%n)@ a# &ayee to $ae %t a&&ear that thede$and draft *a# &ayab(e to %t! *hen %n truth and %n fat and a# the au#ed -ery *e((ne*! %t *a# the 9aner# Tru#t Co$&any *h%h *a# the rea( &ayee a# %nd%ated %nChe ouher No. >8008" and N9 Che No. 92>?B? #u&&ort%n) #a%da&&(%at%on for de$and draftD #ub#e'uent(y au#ed /ELICITO S. MACALINO

(%e*%#e %n#erted %nto the (etter of NCC to N9 9uend%a 9ranh the *ord# &ayab(eto 6aer Maret%n)@ to $ae %t a&&ear that the de$and draft# to be &%ed u& by thede#%)nated $e##en)er *ere &ayab(e to 6aer Maret%n) *hen %n truth and %n fat therea( &ayee *a# 9aner# Tru#t Co$&anyD and a# a re#u(t of #uh at# of fa(#%f%at%on!N9 9uend%a %##ued 1" de$and draft# for 50!000.00 eah and another de$and draftfor>>!?82.11! a((! &ayab(e to 6aer Maret%n)! *h%h *ere #ub#e'uent(y de(%-eredto au#ed /e(%%tor S. Maa(%no and *h%h au#ed LI6A76A7 S. TAN thereafter
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn3


14/110

ehan)ed *%th N9 9a(an)a 9ranh for 1" he# at 50!000.00 eah and anotherfor >>!?82.11 and a(( of *h%h #he (ater de&o#%ted %nto Aount No. 0020282? of6aer Maret%n) at h%(tru#t Cubao! thereby au#%n) &eun%ary da$a)e and

&re+ud%e to h%(%&&%ne Nat%ona( Con#trut%on Cor&orat%on %n the a$ountof "8>!?82.11.

CONTRAR7 TO LA6.

Man%(a! h%(%&&%ne#! Au)u#t 2! 1""2.@MAN

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1"2?8

That on or about the th day of A&r%(! 1""0! and #ub#e'uent(y thereafter! %n theMun%%&a(%ty of Manda(uyon)! Metro Man%(a! and *%th%n the +ur%#d%t%on of th%#,onorab(e Court! the abo-ena$ed au#ed! /ELICITO S. MACALINO! be%n) then

the A##%#tant Mana)er of the Trea#ury %-%#%on and the ,ead of the Loan#Ad$%n%#trat%on and In#urane Set%on of the h%(%&&%ne Nat%ona( Con#trut%onCor&orat%on! a )o-ern$entontro((ed or&orat%on *%th off%e# at ESA ornerRe(%ane St.! Manda(uyon)! Metro Man%(a! and hene! a &ub(% off%er! *h%(e %n the

&erfor$ane of h%# off%%a( funt%on#! ta%n) ad-anta)e of h%# &o#%t%on! o$$%tt%n) theoffen#e %n re(at%on to h%# off%e! and on#&%r%n) and onfederat%n) *%th h%# #&ou#eLI6A76A7 S. TAN! be%n) then the o*ner of 6aer Maret%n)! d%d then and there*%((fu((y! un(a*fu((y! fe(on%ou#(y and by $ean# of dee%t defraud the h%(%&&%ne

Nat%ona( Con#trut%on Cor&orat%on %n the fo((o*%n) $anner after ree%-%n) Cheouher No. 022"0 o-er%n) the &art%a( &ay$ent by NCC of the #%n%n) fund to

Internat%ona( Cor&orate 9an 3Interban4 a# *e(( a# Che No. 552>12 for T6OMILLION T6O ,:NRE /I/T7 T,O:SAN ESOS 32!250!000.004!h%(%&&%ne Curreny! &ayab(e to Interban for the &ur&o#e! au#ed /ELICITOS.MACALINO fa(#%f%ed N9 Che No. 552>12 by a(ter%n) the &ayee %nd%atedthere%n to $ae %t a&&ear that the afore#a%d he *a# &ayab(e to 6aer Maret%n)%n#tead of Interban and further fa(#%f%ed the #hedu(e of he d%#bur#e$ent# #ent toN9 9uend%a by $a%n) %t a&&ear there%n that the &ayee of Che No. 552>12 *a#6aer Maret%n) *hen %n truth and %n fat and a# the au#ed -ery *e(( ne*! %t *a#Interban *h%h *a# the rea( &ayeeD au#ed LI6A76A7 S. TAN thereafterde&o#%ted Che No. 552>12 %nto Aount No. 0020282? of 6aer Maret%n) ath%(tru#t Cubao and 6aer Maret%n) #ub#e'uent(y %##ued h%(tru#t Che No.180>" for 100!000.00 %n fa-or of au#ed /ELICITO S. MACALINOD *h%h at#of fa(#%f%at%on &erfor$ed by the au#ed *ou(d ha-e defrauded the h%(%&&%ne

Nat%ona( Con#trut%on Cor&orat%on of2!250!000.00 had not N9 9uend%a ordered thed%#honor of Che No. 552>12 after not%n) the a(terat%on=era#ure# thereon! therebyfa%(%n) to &rodue the fe(ony by rea#on of au#e# %nde&endent of the *%(( of theau#ed.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn4


15/110

CONTRAR7 TO LA6.

Man%(a! h%(%&&%ne#! May 28! 1"">.@MN

;pon arraignment on :ovember , '8, petitioner pleaded not guilty to

the charges. 1ence, trial proceeded.MN

1owever, during the initial presentation of evidence for the defense,petitioner moved for leave to file a motion to dismiss on the ground that theSandiganbayan has no 0urisdiction over him since he is not a public officerbecause the Philippine :ational Construction Corporation (P:CC), formerlythe Construction and


16/110

Set%on 12. The O$bud#$an and h%# de&ut%e#! a# &rotetor# of the &eo&(e! #ha(( at&ro$&t(y on o$&(a%nt# f%(ed %n any for$ or $anner a)a%n#t&ub(% off%%a(# or e$&(oyee# of the ;o-ern$ent! or any #ubd%-%#%on! a)eny or%n#tru$enta(%ty thereof! %n(ud%n) )o-ern$ento*ned or ontro((ed or&orat%on# .@

Set%on 1>. The Off%e of the O$bud#$an #ha(( ha-e the fo((o*%n) &o*er#!funt%on# and dut%e#

1. In-e#t%)ate on %t# o*n! or on o$&(a%nt by any &er#on! any at or o$%##%on of any&ub(% off%%a( or e$&(oyee! off%e or a)eny! *hen #uh at or o$%##%on a&&ear# to be%((e)a(! un+u#t! %$&ro&er and %neff%%ent.

2. %ret! u&on o$&(a%nt or at %t# %n#tane! any &ub(% off%%a( or e$&(oyee of the)o-ern$ent! or any #ubd%-%#%on! a)eny or %n#tru$enta(%ty thereof! a# *e(( a# of any

)o-ern$ento*ned or ontro((ed or&orat%on# *%thor%)%na( harter#! to &erfor$ ande&ed%te any at or duty re'u%red by (a*! or to #to&! &re-ent! and orret any abu#e or%$&ro&r%ety %n the &erfor$ane of dut%e#.@ 3under#or%n) #u&&(%ed4

"urther, rticle 3?!5, Section 8 (') of the '*6 Constitution provides-

The %-%( #er-%e e$brae# a(( branhe#! #ubd%-%#%on#! %n#tru$enta(%t%e#! and a)en%e#of the ;o-ern$ent! %n(ud%n) )o-ern$ento*ned and ontro((ed or&orat%on# *%thor%)%na( harter#.@ 3under#or%n) #u&&(%ed4

+epublic ct :o. 66 provides-

Set%on 15. o*er#! /unt%on# and ut%e# The Off%e of the O$bud#$an #ha(( ha-ethe fo((o*%n) &o*er#! funt%on# and dut%e#

1. In-e#t%)ate and &ro#eute on %t# o*n or on o$&(a%nt by any &er#on! any at oro$%##%on of any &ub(% off%er or e$&(oyee! off%e or a)eny! *hen #uh at oro$%##%on a&&ear# to be %((e)a(! un+u#t! %$&ro&er or %neff%%ent. .

2. %ret! u&on o$&(a%nt or at %t# o*n %n#tane! any off%er or e$&(oyee of the

;o-ern$ent! or of any #ubd%-%#%on! a)eny or %n#tru$enta(%ty thereof! a# *e(( a# any)o-ern$ento*ned or ontro((ed or&orat%on# *%thor%)%na( harter#! to &erfor$ ande&ed%te any at or duty re'u%red by (a*! or to #to&! &re-ent! and orret any abu#e or%$&ro&r%ety %n the &erfor$ane of dut%e#.@

3nasmuch as the P:CC has no original charter as it was incorporatedunder the general law on corporations, it follows inevitably that petitioner is not


17/110

a public officer within the coverage of +. . :o. /', as amended. Thus, theSandiganbayan has no 0urisdiction over him. The only instance when theSandiganbayan has 0urisdiction over a private individual is when the complaintcharges him either as a co!principal, accomplice or accessory of a publicofficer who has been charged with a crime within the 0urisdiction ofSandiganbayan. M''N

The casesM'8Ncited by respondent People of the Philippines are inapplicablebecause they were decided under the provisions of the '6/ Constitutionwhich included as public officers, officials and employees of corporationsowned and controlled by the government though organied and eDisting underthe general corporation law. The '*6 Constitution eDcluded suchcorporations.

The crimes charged against petitioner were committed in '* and '.M'/NThe criminal actions were instituted in '8. 3t is well!settled that the

0urisdiction of a court to try a criminal case is determined by the law in force atthe institution of the action.QM'AN

T(e Fao

#N *#E HEREOF, the Court G+:TS the petition. The Court S#TSS3, AAN FRANC#!CO!. GARC#ANO, 0% (03 :a/a:0'y a3 Gra, respondents.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/feb2002/140199_200.htm#_edn14


18/110

" E C # ! # O N

AZCUNA, J.

special civil action for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus is before us.

The facts are fairly simple.

Petitioner lvin 5. Garcia, as then mayor of Cebu City, signed a contractwith ".#. Kuellig on $ay 6, '*. ".#. Kuellig is the Philippine distributor of5itumeD, a brand name of an asphalt product. The contract essentiallyprovided that ".#. Kuellig shall be the eDclusive supplier of asphalt for thecityOs asphalt batching plant for a period of three years, from '* to 8',with the initial delivery of asphalt in September, '*.

SubseEuently, petitioner was elected to a new term as mayor. Therespondent


19/110

%n ugust ', ', the %ffice of the City uditor filed with the 1?B and ado&t%n) the Co$$%ttee onA*ard# Re#o(ut%on #er%e# of 1""B! a three 3>4 year ontrat *a# $ade and eeuted byand bet*een the C%ty of Cebu re&re#ented by ,on. A(-%n 9. ;ar%a here%nafterreferred to a# the buyer@ and /.E. Hue((%) In. re&re#ented by %t# ;enera( Mana)er!M%he( M%(oda here%nafter referred to a# the Se((er@D

d. That #a%d three 3>4 year ontrat *a# OI #%ne there *a# no a-a%(ab(ea&&ro&r%at%on= fund# to o-er the &ro&o#ed e&end%ture# at the t%$e of the eeut%on ofthe ontrat %n -%o(at%on of Set%on 85 and 8? of 15 other*%#e no*n a# theState Aud%t FCGode of the h%(%&&%ne#. Con#e'uent(y! the off%er# enter%n) %nto theontrat #ha(( be (%ab(e to the )o-ern$ent a# &ro-%ded for %n Set%on 8B of the #a$eode. Moreo-er! the eeut%on by the C%ty Mayor of a three 3>4 year ontrateeeded the author%ty )ranted to h%$ by the San))un%an) an(un)#od &er SRe#o(ut%on No. >1?BD

). That the C%ty of Cebu %# ob(%)ated to &ay /.E. Hue((%) In. a f%ed a$ount %ndo((ar 3>.184 &er $etr% ton but &ayab(e %n h%(%&&%ne e#o *h%h #%tuat%on %#d%#ad-anta)eou# to the C%ty %n -%e* of the f(utuat%n) -a(uat%on of the h%(%&&%ne e#o-%# a -%# the :S o((ar. A# a re#u(t! the C%ty *%(( )et on(y the e'u%-a(ent 'uant%ty of9%tu$en de&end%n) u&on the &re-a%(%n) rate of h%(%&&%ne e#o at the t%$e of
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/148944.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/148944.htm#_ftn5


20/110

&ay$ent. And be#%de#! Set%on# 5 and B of COA C%ru(ar No. "2>8? &ro-%de thatthe &r%e $u#t be erta%n and def%n%te %n a$ount and $u#t be %n h%(%&&%ne Curreny#&e%a((y #o that the ontrat%n) &arty %# a f%r$ o&erat%n) %n the h%(%&&%ne#D

h. That the &r%e offered by /.E. Hue((%) In. to #e(( %t# &rodut %n 9%tuonta%ner#

*a# at 1B! B2B.20 &er $etr% ton *h%h &ur&orted(y %t 3#%4%n(uded the tehno(o)y but the -ery #a$e &rodut ou(d be &urha#ed at a (o*er

&r%e %n the (oa( $aret at 8!"B5.00 &er $etr% ton. A# a on#e'uene! the C%ty;o-ern$ent had to &ay the a$ount of 1"!1B!"18.00 +u#t for the u#e of9%tuonta%ner# a(one. The rea#onab(ene## therefore of the &r%e &a%d %# ,I;,L7O:9T/:LD

%. That before the eeut%on by the C%ty Mayor of a three 3>4 year ontrat! theC%ty ;o-ern$ent had a(ready &urha#ed A#&ha(t 85=100 enetrat%on ;rade 9u( fro$/.E. Hue((%) In. &er urha#e Order No#. >1?! 15>! and 1"8D

+. That the tran#at%on# $ent%oned %n the %$$ed%ate(y &reed%n) &ara)ra&h *ere,I;,L7 J:ESTIONA9LE %n -%e* of the fat that fu(( &ay$ent# *ere $ade e-en %fthe %te$# *ere not yet de(%-ered! *herea# O No. ?"5 #ub+et of the %n'u%ry 3underontrat4 a((# for the de(%-ery of ?00 $etr% ton# of A#&ha(t 85=100 at 1B!B2B.20 or atota( a$ount of 10!?>?!>20.00 Fand the#eG *ere not de(%-ered at a(( %n #&%te of fu((

&ay$ent $ade a(( of *h%h FareG %n -%o(at%on of Set%on >>8 of RA B1?0 and Set%on88 of 15DO

The State uditors later filed a supplemental 0oint affidavit dated pril '*,8, wherein they disclosed other details such as the alleged ghostdeliveries of asphalt.OF

Special Prosecution %fficer Tagaan resigned from office in &anuary, 8and his name was subseEuently dropped as complainant. 1ence, during the

0oint clarificatory hearing and preliminary conference before the


21/110

6,ERE/ORE! and &ur#uant to Se. ! ara)ra&h 9! Ru(e II and Set%on 5!ara)ra&h A! Ru(e III of Ad$%n%#trat%-e Order No. B %##ued by the Off%e of theO$bud#$an! you are hereby ordered to f%(e your ounteraff%da-%t to the here%nattahed fatf%nd%n) %n'u%ry re&ort of the Co$&(a%nant! COMMISSION ON A:ITRe)%on II! Cebu C%ty! to)ether *%th the Ko%nt State$ent of State Aud%tor# ,%(ar%o

Cabrero# and Su(&%%o Jue+ada! Kr.! a# *e(( a# the%r Su&&(e$enta( Ko%nt Aff%da-%t to the#a%d COA re&ort! *%th%n TEN 3104 A7S fro$ ree%&t hereof *%th &roof of #er-%ethereof to the o$&(a%nant=# *ho $ay f%(e h%#=her=the%r re&(yaff%da-%t *%th%n TEN3104 A7S fro$ ree%&t of #uh ounteraff%da-%t. 7our fa%(ure to f%(e your ounteraff%da-%t and other ontro-ert%n) e-%dene=# *%(( $ean a *a%-er on your &art to refutethe har)e# a)a%n#t you and the a#e *%(( be re#o(-ed on the e-%dene=# on reord. O9

Petitioner Garcia did not comply with the said %rder and instead filed, on

:ovember 88, 8, a $otion to be "urnished a Copy of the Complaint!ffidavit and $otion to Suspend 3mplementation of the %rder dated %ctober /,8. 3n a second %rder dated


22/110

See4ing now to dismiss the criminal investigation before the %mbudsman,doc4eted as %$5!23S!C+3$!!A, and to restrain respondents fromproceeding with the preliminary investigation on the matter, petitioner has filedthe present case.

Petitioner raises the following Euestions-#.

OES T,E COA SECIAL A:IT REORT CONSTIT:TE A ALICOMLAINT T,AT IS S://ICIENT TO S:ORT A CRIMINALROCEEIN;

##.

I RESONENTS ACT 6IT, ;RAE A9:SE O/ ISCRETION

AMO:NTIN; TO LAC OR Ee start with the rules.

Sections (8) and (A), +ule 33 of dministrative %rder :o. 6 or the +ules ofProcedure of the %ffice of the %mbudsman provide-

Se. 2.Evaluation :&on e-a(uat%n) the o$&(a%nt! the %n-e#t%)at%n) off%er#ha(( reo$$end *hether or not %t $ay be

a4 d%#$%##ed outr%)ht for *ant of &a(&ab(e $er%t

b4 referred to re#&ondent for o$$entD

4 endor#ed to the &ro&er )o-ern$ent off%e or a)eny *h%h ha#+ur%#d%t%on o-er the a#eD

d4 for*arded to the a&&ro&r%ate off%e or off%%a( for fatf%nd%n)%n-e#t%)at%onD

e4 referred for ad$%n%#trat%-e ad+ud%at%onD or

f4 #ub+eted to a &re(%$%nary %n-e#t%)at%on
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/148944.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2003/feb2003/148944.htm#_ftn11


23/110

Se. .Procedure The &re(%$%nary %n-e#t%)at%on of a#e# fa((%n) under the+ur%#d%t%on of the Sand%)anbayan and the Re)%ona( Tr%a( Court #ha(( be onduted %nthe $anner &re#r%bed %n Set%on >! Ru(e 112 of the Ru(e# of Court! #ub+et to the

fo((o*%n) &ro-%#%on#

a4 If the o$&(a%nt %# not under oath or %# ba#ed on(y on off%%a( re&ort#! the%n-e#t%)at%n) off%er #ha(( re'u%re the o$&(a%nant or #u&&ort%n) *%tne##e# toeeute aff%da-%t# to #ub#tant%ate the o$&(a%nt#.

b4 After #uh aff%da-%t# ha-e been #eured! the %n-e#t%)at%n) off%er #ha(( %##uean order! attah%n) thereto a o&y of the aff%da-%t# and other #u&&ort%n)dou$ent#! d%ret%n) the re#&ondent to #ub$%t! *%th%n ten 3104 day# fro$ree%&t thereof! h%# ounteraff%da-%t# and ontro-ert%n) e-%dene *%th &roof

of #er-%e thereof on the o$&(a%nant. The o$&(a%nant $ay f%(e re&(yaff%da-%t# *%th%n ten 3104 day# after #er-%e of the ounteraff%da-%t#.

4 If the re#&ondent doe# not f%(e a ounteraff%da-%t! the %n-e#t%)at%n) off%er$ay on#%der the o$$ent f%(ed by h%$! %f any! a# h%# an#*er to theo$&(a%nt. In any e-ent! the re#&ondent #ha(( ha-e ae## to the e-%deneon reord

d4 No $ot%on to d%#$%## #ha(( be a((o*ed ee&t for (a of+ur%#d%t%on. Ne%ther $ay a $ot%on for a b%(( of &art%u(ar# be enterta%ned. If

re#&ondent de#%re# any $atter %n theo$&(a%nt# aff%da-%t to be (ar%f%ed! the &art%u(ar%Pat%on thereof $ay bedone at the t%$e of (ar%f%atory 'ue#t%on%n) %n the $anner &ro-%ded %n

&ara)ra&h 3f4 of th%# #et%on.

e4 If the re#&ondent annot be #er-ed *%th the order $ent%oned %n &ara)ra&h ?hereof! or ha-%n) been #er-ed! doe# not o$&(y there*%th! the o$&(a%nt#ha(( be dee$ed #ub$%tted for re#o(ut%on on the ba#%# of the e-%dene onreord.

f4 If! after the f%(%n) of the re'u%#%te aff%da-%t# and the%r #u&&ort%n) e-%dene#!there are fat# $ater%a( to be the a#e *h%h the %n-e#t%)at%n) off%er $ayneed to be (ar%f%ed on! he $ay ondut a (ar%f%atory hear%n) dur%n) *h%hthe &art%e# #ha(( be afforded the o&&ortun%ty to be &re#ent but *%thout ther%)ht to ea$%ne or ro##ea$%ne the *%tne## be%n) 'ue#t%oned. 6here thea&&earane of the &art%e# or *%tne##e# %# %$&rat%ab(e! the (ar%f%atory'ue#t%on%n) $ay be onduted %n *r%t%n)! *hereby the 'ue#t%on# de#%red to


24/110

be a#ed by the %n-e#t%)at%n) off%er or a &arty #ha(( be redued %nto *r%t%n)and #er-ed on the *%tne## onerned *ho #ha(( be re'u%red to an#*er the#a$e %n *r%t%n) and under oath.

)4 :&on the ter$%nat%on of the &re(%$%nary %n-e#t%)at%on! the %n-e#t%)at%n)

off%er #ha(( for*ard the reord# of the a#e to)ether *%th h%# re#o(ut%on tothe de#%)nated author%t%e# for the%r a&&ro&r%ate at%on thereon.

No %nfor$at%on $ay be f%(ed and no o$&(a%nt $ay be d%#$%##ed *%thout the *r%ttenauthor%ty or a&&ro-a( of the O$bud#$an %n a#e# fa((%n) *%th%n the +ur%#d%t%on of theSand%)anbayan! or the &ro&er e&uty O$bud#$an %n a(( other a#e#.

>e recognie the importance of the complainant submitting his affidavit

and the affidavits of his witnesses. The reason is that after the%mbudsman and his deputies have gathered evidence, their investigationceases to be general and eDploratory, and the proceedings ta4e on anadversarial nature.O12

Petitioner argues that the %mbudsman cannot compel him to file acounter!affidavit because no valid complaint eDists against him. 1e claimsthat the C% Special udit +eport and the supporting affidavits submitted byState uditors Cabreros and Iue0ada do not constitute a validcomplaint. Petitioner cites (uterte $. SandiganbayanO13wherein we held that a

C% Special udit +eport is not eEuivalent to the affidavits reEuired underSection A, +ule 33 of .%. :o. 6.

PetitionerOs reliance on (uterteis misplaced. >hen petitioners thereinwere as4ed to file a comment on a C% Special udit +eport, they werealready being sub0ected to a preliminary investigation @0'(ou' be0%8 3o0%


25/110

comply with the specific legal standards by which the sufficiency of acomplaint is 0udged. 1e cites Matilde, r. $. absonO1and contends that thecomplaint filed against him prior to his filing his counter!affidavit must allegethe acts complained of as constituting an offense. 1e further maintains thatthese allegations must be in an ordinary and concise language to enable aperson of common understanding to 4now what offense is intended to becharged and the court to render proper 0udgment.

3t should be noted that in Matilde, the assailed informations not onlyuniformly charged the accused for simple theft but also alleged that theaccused were wor4ing in the company to whom the stolen articles belongedand that these accused were wor4ing on or using or producingQ the stolenarticles as employees of the company. The lower court therein found theaccused guilty under Presidential


26/110

law. Said affidavits clearly state that petitioner Garcia, by entering into athree!year contract with ".#. Kuellig, eDceeded the authority granted to him bythe Sangguniang Panlungsod (SP) in SP +esolution :o. /'6. The affidavitsalso outline how the sub0ect contract is allegedly manifestly disadvantageousto the city, in violation of the nti!Graft and Corrupt Practices ct. O1F ll theseare serious and specific allegations under oath that warrant as4ing petitionerto submit a counter!affidavit to present his side.

"inally, the fact that Special Prosecution %fficer Tagaan already resignedfrom his office and that his name was withdrawn as complainant from the caseis of no fatal conseEuence. "irst, TagaanOs report and affidavit still form part ofthe records of the case. 1e could still be called by subpoena ifnecessary. Second, we agree with the Solicitor General that Tagaan was anominal party, whose duty as special prosecutor was to investigate thecommission of crimes and

file the corresponding complaint whenever warranted.O17 Since the illegalacts imputed are public offenses, the real complainant is the State, which isrepresented by the remaining complainants.

HEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is


27/110

/. R

A. The said crime was committed as follows-

A.' %n &une A, 8/, at on or about '' p.m., in a house located in San &uan, $etro $anila, a meeting washeld and presided by Senator 1onasan. A''a:(e& a3 A%%e B 03 '(e a


28/110

''. That in the course of the meeting, he presented the plan of action to achieve the goals of :+P, i.e.,overthrow of the government under the present leadership thru armed revolution and after which, a 0unta willbe constituted and that 0unta will run the new government. 1e further said that some of us will resign fromthe military service and occupy civilian positions in the new government. 1e also said that there is urgencythat we implement this plan and that we would be notified of the neDt activities.

'8. That after the discussion and his presentation, he eDplained the rites that we were to undergo!some sort

of Fblood compactF. 1e read a prayer that sounded more li4e a pledge and we all recited it with raised armsand clenched fists. 1e then too4 a 4nife and demonstrated how to ma4e a cut on the left upper inner armuntil it bleeds. The cut was in form of the letter F3F in the old alphabet but was done in a way that it actuallyloo4ed li4e letter F1F. Then, he pressed his right thumb against the blood and pressed the thumb on thelower middle portion of the copy of the Prayer. 1e then covered his thumb mar4 in blood with tape. 1e thenpressed the cut on his left arm against the :+P flag and left mar4 of letter F3F on it. #verybody else followedH

'/. That when my turn came, 3 slightly made a cut on my upper inner arm and pric4ed a portion of it to let itbleed and 3 followed what Senator 1%:S: didH

'A. That 3 did not li4e to participate in the rites but 3 had the fear for my life with what Senator 1%:S:said that FR4aya nating pumatay ng 4asamahanFH

'. That after the rites, the meeting was ad0ourned and we left the placeH

'. That 3 avoided Captain le0ano after that meeting but 3 was eDtra cautious that he would not notice it forfear of my life due to the threat made by Senator 1%:S: during the meeting on &une A, 8/ and theinformation relayed to me by Captain le0ano that their group had already deeply established their networ4inside the intelligence communityH

'6. That sometime in the first wee4 of &uly 8/, Captain le0ano came to see me to return the rifle that heborrowed and told me that when the group arrives at the $alacaang Compound for F

'*. That on Sunday, &uly 86, 8/, while watching the television, 3 saw flashed on the screen 9ieutenantntonio Trillanes, Captain Gerardo Gambala, Captain le0ano and some others who were present during the

&une Ath

meeting that 3 attended, having a press conference about their occupation of the %a4wood 1otel. 3also saw that the letter F3F on the arm bands and the banner is the same letter F3F in the banner which wasdisplayed and on which we pressed our wound to leave the imprint of the letter F3FH

'. That this ffidavit is being eDecuted in order to attest the veracity of the foregoing and in order to chargeS#:T%+ G+#G%+3% FG+3:G%F 1%:S:, Capt. "#93? T;+3:G:, Capt. G+= 9#&:%, 9t.

:T%:3% T+399:#S, Capt. G#++


29/110

%n ugust 86, 8/, Senator Gregorio 5. 1onasan 33 filed through counsel a F$otion to Clarify &urisdictionF.%n September ', 8/, complainant filed a Comment@%pposition to the said motion.

The motion and comment@opposition are hereby duly noted and shall be passed upon in the resolution ofthis case.

3n the meantime, in view of the submission by complainant of additional affidavits@evidence and to affordrespondents ample opportunity to controvert the same, respondents, thru counsel are hereby directed to filetheir respective counter!affidavits and controverting evidence on or before September 8/, 8/.'

1ence, Senator Gregorio 5. 1onasan 33 filed the herein petition for certiorariunder +ule of the +ules of Courtagainst the hether respondent hether %mbudsman!hether respondent


30/110

'. The


31/110

Sec. /. Powers and "unctions ! To accomplish its mandate, the #%?e3'08a'e '(e :o;;0330o% o< :r0;e3, /ro3e:u'e o


32/110

(') 3nvestigate and prosecute on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of any publicofficer or employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, un0ust, improper orinefficient. #' (a3 /r0;ary ur03&0:'0o% o?er :a3e3 :o8%0abe by '(e !a%&08a%baya% a%&, 0% '(eeer:03e o< '(03 /r0;ary ur03&0:'0o%, 0' ;ay 'ae o?er, a' a%y 3'a8e, hence, focus is directed to the second sentence of paragraph('), Section ' of the %mbudsman ct which specifically provides that the %mbudsman has primary 0urisdiction overcases cogniable by the Sandiganbayan, and, in the eDercise of this primary 0urisdiction, it may ta4e over, at anystage, from any investigating agency of the government, the investigation of such cases.

That the power of the %mbudsman to investigate offenses involving public officers or employees is not eDclusive butis concurrent with other similarly authoried agencies of the government such as the provincial, city and stateprosecutors has long been settled in several decisions of the Court.

3n Co+uangco, r. $s. !residential Coission on *ood *o$ernent,decided in ', the Court eDpressly declared-

reading of the foregoing provision of the Constitution does not show that the power of investigationincluding preliminary investigation vested on the %mbudsman is eDclusive./

3nterpreting the primary 0urisdiction of the %mbudsman under Section ' (') of the %mbudsman ct, the Court held insaid case-

;nder Section ' (') of +epublic ct :o. 66 aforecited, the %mbudsman has primary 0urisdiction overcases cogniable by the Sandiganbayan so that it may ta4e over at any stage from any investigatory agencyof the government, the investigation of such cases. T(e au'(or0'y o< '(e O;bu&3;a% 'o 0%?e3'08a'eo


33/110

30;0ary au'(or0e& a8e%:0e3 o< '(e 8o?er%;e%'. !u:( 0%?e3'08a'ory a8e%:0e3 re


34/110

Petitioners finally assert that the information and amended information filed in this case needed the approvalof the %mbudsman. 3t is not disputed that the information and amended information here did not have theapproval of the %mbudsman. 1owever, we do not believe that such approval was necessary at all. 3n


35/110

reveal that the crime committed by public officers or employees must be Fin relation to their officeF if it is tofall within the 0urisdiction of the Sandiganbayan. This phrase which is traceable to Pres.


36/110

3n a recent dialogue between the %""3C# %" T1# %$5;


37/110

(b) &udges of the $unicipal Trial Courts and $unicipal Circuit Trial CourtsH

(c) :ational and +egional State ProsecutorsH and

(d) %ther officers as may be authoried by law.

T(e0r au'(or0'y 'o :o%&u:' /re0;0%ary 0%?e3'08a'0o% 3(a 0%:u&e a :r0;e3 :o8%0abe by '(e /ro/er:our' 0% '(e0r re3/e:'0?e 'err0'or0a ur03&0:'0o%3.

S#C. A. +esolution of investigating prosecutor and its review. ! 3f the investigating prosecutor finds cause tohold the respondent for trial, he shall prepare the resolution and information, 1e shall certify under oath inthe information that he, or as shown by the record, an authoried officer, has personally eDamined thecomplainant and his witnessesH that there is reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been committedand that the accused is probably guilty thereofH that the accused was informed of the complaint and of theevidence submitted against himH and that he was given an opportunity to submit controverting evidence.%therwise, he shall recommend the dismissal of the complaint.

>ithin five () days from his resolution, he shall forward the record of the case to the provincial or cityprosecutor or chief state prosecutor, or 'o '(e O;bu&3;a% or (03 &e/u'y 0% :a3e3 o< o


38/110

To reiterate for emphasis, the power to investigate or conduct preliminary investigation on charges against any publicofficers or employees may be eDercised by an investigator or by any provincial or city prosecutor or their assistants,either in their regular capacities or as deputied %mbudsman prosecutors. The fact that all prosecutors are in effectdeputied %mbudsman prosecutors under the %$5!e agree with and adopt the %mbudsmans dissertation on the matter, to wit-

Petitioner appears to be of the belief, although NOTfounded on a proper reading and application of0urisprudence, that %$5!


39/110


40/110

8. That on "ebruary ', '/, respondent Catarro0a signed and issued twenty (8)health certificates to employees of the $aD restaurant even without the reEuiredphysical and medical eDaminations and immuniations, in consideration of theamount of PA. which was paid by Pons Sepulveda for and in behalf of saidemployeesH

/. That li4ewise on the same date aforestated, respondent Catarro0a issued healthcertificate :o. '!/ to one lberto de &esus without the reEuired physical andmedical eDamination and immuniation, after the latter had paid an additional andunreceipted amount of P. demanded by one of the staff in the office ofrespondent Catarro0a. 1owever, the said health certificate is not recorded in theofficial logboo4 of his office for duly issued health certificates.M/N

Section /, paragraphs (b), (e) and (h) of + /' provides-

SEC. >. Corru&t &rat%e# of &ub(% off%er#.

3b4 %ret(y or %nd%ret(y re'ue#t%n) or ree%-%n) any )%ft! &re#ent! #hare!

&erenta)e! or benef%t! for h%$#e(f or for any other &er#on! %n onnet%on *%th anyontrat or tran#at%on bet*een the ;o-ern$ent and any other &arty! *here%n the

&ub(% off%er %n h%# off%%a( a&a%ty ha# to %nter-ene under the (a*.

3e4 Cau#%n) any undue %n+ury to any &arty! %n(ud%n) the ;o-ern$ent! or )%-%n) any&r%-ate &arty any un*arranted benef%t#! ad-anta)e or &referene %n the d%#har)e of h%#off%%a( ad$%n%#trat%-e or +ud%%a( funt%on# throu)h $an%fe#t &art%a(%ty! e-%dent badfa%th or )ro## %neu#ab(e ne)(%)ene. Th%# &ro-%#%on #ha(( a&&(y to off%er# and

e$&(oyee# of off%e# or )o-ern$ent or&orat%on# har)ed *%th the )rant of (%en#e# or&er$%t# or other one##%on#.

3h4 %ret(y or %nd%ret(y ha-%n) f%nan%a( or &eun%ary %ntere#t %n any bu#%ne##!ontrat or tran#at%on %n onnet%on *%th *h%h he %nter-ene# or tae# &art %n h%#off%%a( a&a%ty! or %n *h%h he %# &roh%b%ted by the Con#t%tut%on or by any (a* fro$ha-%n) any %ntere#t.

Private respondents counter!alleged that petitioner had neither thepersonality to sue nor personal 4nowledge of the veracity of the complaint,which was mere hearsay, not having been supported by any affidavit from thepurportedly affected, if not fictitious, health certificate applicants or sanitaryinspectors. lso, petitioner did not present any of his witnesses before theinvestigating committee created by then Iueon City $ayor 3smael $athay.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/sep2004/117741.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/sep2004/117741.htm#_ftn3


41/110

Thus, private respondents filed counter!charges against petitioner for libel,falsification and per0ury.MAN

%n $ay 86, 'A, public respondent, through Graft 3nvestigation %fficer9amberto G. Sagum, issued a 0oint resolution dismissing the cases filed by

both parties-

6,ERE/ORE! &re$%#e# on#%dered! there be%n) no &robab(e au#e to +u#t%fy further%n'u%ry %nto the %n#tant har)e# and ounterhar)e# e$bod%ed %n the abo-eent%t(eda#e#! (et the#e a#e# be! a# the #a$e are! hereby reo$$ended! ISMISSE.

SO RESOLE.MN

$r. +aul +. rnau and ssistant %mbudsman belardo 9. portadera, &r.reviewed and later on endorsed the aforesaid 0oint resolution to %verall


42/110

manifests that they secured them after paying the fees without undergoing theusual physical and medical eDamination and immuniation.

:onetheless, public respondent found that-

FTGhe har)e and a((e)at%on# #et forth %n the o$&(a%ntaff%da-%t taen %n +uta&o#%t%on*%th the ontro-ert%n) #tate$ent# of an#*er%n) re#&ondent# on reord! ne)ate thead-er#e #&e%f%at%on# e$bod%ed %n the #a%d o$&(a%ntaff%da-%t to the effet thatre#&ondent# Leon%to Catarro+a and Nor$a SanheP ha-e -%o(ated the &ro-%#%on# of theAnt%;raft La* 3R.A. >01"! a# a$ended4. A# ha# been abo-e e(u%dated by the%rre#&et%-e ounter#tate$ent#! %t a&&ear# that the e-%dene on reord fa%(ed to#ub#tant%ate the a((e)ed ano$a(%e# &er&etrated by the here%n re#&ondent#. In the f%r#t

&(ae! o$&(a%nant *a# not ab(e to &re#ent e-%dene d%#(o#%n) the fat that there areother hea(th ert%f%ate# *h%h *ere &r%nted &er#ona((y by re#&ondent Catarro+a. :&onthe other hand! the S&e%a( Co$$%ttee *h%h %n-e#t%)ated the a((e)ed ano$a(%e# %n the

San%tat%on %-%#%on of the JuePon C%ty ,ea(th e&art$ent! a$e u& *%th the f%nd%n)#that the hea(th ert%f%ate %##ued to A(berto de Ke#u# a(%a# Ce(er%no de(a CruP! *a#

&r%nted and %##ued off%%a((y by the JuePon C%ty ,ea(th e&art$ent. On th%# #ore! norebutt%n) e-%dene *hat#oe-er! *a# #ub$%tted re)ard%n) the &re&r%nted and un#er%a(%Ped hea(th ert%f%ate#. Indeed! a# &ut forth by the re#&ondent#! o$&(a%nant d%dnot $%nd &re#ent%n) the #*orn #tate$ent# of any of the a((e)ed o$&(a%n%n) *%tne##e#$ent%oned %n h%# o$&(a%ntaff%da-%t to #u&&ort the naed #tate$ent# a)a%n#t there#&ondent#.

To th%# etent! *e are hard &ut to #ee ho* the &ro-%#%on# of the Ant%;raft La* ha-e

been -%o(ated by the re#&ondent#. /or one th%n)! re#&ondent# d%d not au#e undue%n+ury to the a((e)ed o$&(a%n%n) *%tne##e# and $uh (e##! to the a((e)eda&&(%ant#. Ne%ther! d%d re#&ondent# )%-e any &r%-ate &arty any un*arranted benef%t#!ad-anta)e or &referene %n the d%#har)e of the%r off%%a( funt%on#. At any rate! theS&e%a( Co$$%ttee ha-%n) been ta#ed to %n-e#t%)ate the denun%at%on# ofo$&(a%nant Coun%(or Mo%#e# Sa$#on *h%h re(ate to the #a$e fatua( %##ue# a# %nthe %n#tant a#e! found no #uff%%ent e-%dene to *arrant further %n-e#t%)at%on a)a%n#tre#&ondent Leon%to Catarro+a. In the #a$e $anner! the #a%d Co$$%ttee a(#o fa%(ed touno-er any %ota of e-%dene a)a%n#t re#&ondent Nor$a SanheP. 3See the Co$$%tteeRe&ort! &&. >1>>>! Reord#4.

A(( of the abo-e! taen to)ether are $ore than #uff%%ent to d%#&ro-e the a##ert%on# thatano$a(%e# *ere &er&etrated %n the San%tat%on %-%#%on of the JuePon C%ty ,ea(the&art$ent bear%n) on the %##uane# of hea(th ert%f%ate#.

There an! therefore! be no other on(u#%on other than the har)e and %t##&e%f%at%on# are de-o%d of (e)a( and fatua( +u#t%f%at%on# and that for a(( %ntent# and


43/110

&ur&o#e#! the %n#tant a#e %# a $ere &rodut of an unfounded #u#&%%on of o$&(a%nanthere%n.M*N

3n its ugust 8, 'A order, public respondent also sEuarely andthoroughly passed upon the issues raised in petitionerOs motion for partial

reconsideration-

FTGhe fatua( and (e)a( %##ue# ra%#ed there%n had been a(ready a$&(y &a##ed u&on!dea(t *%th and on#%dered &a%n#ta%n)(y to the etent that the Re#o(ut%on $er%ted theun'ua(%f%ed a&&ro-a( of the ,onorab(e O-era(( e&uty O$bud#$an. To on#%derthe$ a)a%n on the ba#%# of the #a$e re&re#entat%on# and rat%ona(%Pat%on after they had

been #ho*n to be untenab(e! *ou(d &erfore! re#u(t %n the #a$e on(u#%on andreo$$endat%on.

A# %t *ere! the e##ene of the )round re$a%n# the #a$e. ,o*e-er! +u#t to #et fore-er

at re#t the atua( and (e)a( %##ue# rera%#ed %n th%# $ot%on! *e #ha(( ne-erthe(e##! taethe$ u& one a)a%n.

Re the a((e)ed &r%nt%n) of other hea(th ert%f%ate# by re#&ondent Catarro+a! (et %t be#a%d &o%nted(y %n th%# a#e! that fro$ the te#t%$on%e# of the e$&(oyee# of the JuePonC%ty ,ea(th e&art$ent and other off%e# %n(ud%n) o$&(a%nant# *%tne##! A(berto deKe#u#! the S&e%a( Co$$%ttee *h%h %n-e#t%)ated the ano$a(%e# #u&&o#ed(y

&er&etrated by #o$e &er#onne( %n the San%tat%on %-%#%on fa%(ed to uno-er e-%dene ordou$ent# that tended to #ho* or &ro-e that there are other hea(th ert%f%ate# *h%hhad been &r%nted &er#ona((y by re#&ondent Catarro+a. In fat! &er (o)boo! the hea(th

ert%f%ate %##ued to A(berto de Ke#u# a(%a# Ce(er%no de(a CruP *a# &r%nted and %##uedoff%%a((y by the JuePon C%ty ,ea(th e&art$ent. /urther! the #a%d o$$%ttee dur%n)the our#e of %t# %n-e#t%)at%on had found that the Ad$%n%#trat%-e %-%#%on &roure##uff%%ent hea(th for$# needed by the #a%d e&art$ent %n(ud%n) hea(th ert%f%ate#and that there *a# no e-%dene &re#ented or turned u& *h%h #ho*ed that there arefae or unauthor%Ped hea(th ert%f%ate# 3See &&. 1>81>"! Reord#4.

A# re)ard# the a##ert%on of o$&(a%nant that t*enty 3204 un#er%a(%Ped hea(thert%f%ate# bear the #%)nature# of re#&ondent Catarro+a and hene! %t *ou(d #tand to#ho* that re#&ondent Catarro+a d%d %t# &r%nt%n) &er#ona((y a# the #a%d #a$&(e# are

$ore than enou)h to e#tab(%#h the fat of &r%nt%n).

On th%# #ore! #uff%e %t to #tate that the %n-e#t%)at%n) Co$$%ttee a(#o noted that fro$the te#t%$ony of *%tne## Mr#. Monto+o %t %# d%#(o#ed that #he enountered a&&(%ant#*ho *ere a(ready ho(der# of hea(th ert%f%ate#. ,o*e-er! the #a$e *%tne## e&re##edher doubt# a# to the authent%%ty of the #%)nature of re#&ondent Catarro+a. Moreo-er!re#&ondent Catarro+a &ut# %t orret(y *hen he ontended that o$&(a%nant d%d not
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/sep2004/117741.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/sep2004/117741.htm#_ftn8


44/110

*%tne## the tran#at%on bet*een the f%er# and the a&&(%ant# *ho a((e)ed(y bou)hthea(th ert%f%ate# *%thout a((e)ed(y ha-%n) under)one the u#ua( &hy#%a( and $ed%a(ea$%nat%on# and %$$un%Pat%on and #o! he %# not a o$&etent *%tne## to te#t%fy on theauthent%%ty of the #a%d hea(th ert%f%ate# a# he *a# not &r%-y to the a((e)ed %((e)a(tran#at%on.

L%e*%#e! re#&ondent Catarro+a a##e-erated that o$&(a%nant fa%(ed to &re#ento$&etent *%tne## before the #a%d #&e%a( Co$$%ttee *h%h onduted the fatf%nd%n) %n-e#t%)at%on. Ne%ther! d%d he &re#ent the #*orn #tate$ent# of any of thea((e)ed o$&(a%n%n) *%tne##e# $ent%oned %n h%# o$&(a%ntaff%da-%t to #ub#tant%ate the

bare #tate$ent# a)a%n#t the re#&ondent#.MN

"or private respondents to be held criminally liable under paragraph (b) ofSection / of + /', they must have reEuested or received, directly orindirectly, any gift or benefit for themselves or for another public officer who

has to intervene in any contract or transaction with the government. ;nderparagraph (e), they must have given unwarranted benefits with evident badfaith, gross ineDcusable negligence or manifest partiality. ;nder paragraph (h),they must have had a financial interest, directly or indirectly, in any transactionin which they too4 part in their official function or in any transaction in whichthey were prohibited by the Constitution or any law from having any interesttherein.

=et, petitioner failed to present any proof that there was probable cause tohold private respondents liable under any of the aforestated

provisions. Sufficient proof of guilt of the private respondents should havebeen adduced by petitioner so that when the case is eventually tried, the trialcourt may not be compelled, as a matter of law, to order an acEuittal. 3f the%mbudsman, using professional 0udgment, finds the case dismissible, theCourt shall respect such finding, unless clothed with grave abuse ofdiscretion. %therwise, the courts will be grievously hampered by innumerablepetitions assailing the dismissal of investigatory proceedings by the%mbudsman with regard to complaints filed before it. 3n much the same way,the courts will be swamped with cases if they will have to review the eDerciseof discretion by fiscals or prosecuting attorneys each time the latter decide to

file an information in court or dismiss a complaint by a private complainant.M'N

The Constitution and + 66 (the %mbudsman ct of '*Q) endowedthe %ffice of the %mbudsman with a wide latitude of investigatory andprosecutorial powers, virtually free from legislative, eDecutive or 0udicialintervention, in order to insulate it from outside pressure and improperinfluence. Section '/('), rticle ?3 of the '*6 Constitution provides-
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/sep2004/117741.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/sep2004/117741.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/sep2004/117741.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/sep2004/117741.htm#_ftn10


45/110

Se. 1>. The Off%e of the O$bud#$an #ha(( ha-e the fo((o*%n) &o*er#! funt%on#!and dut%e#

(') 3nvestigate on its own, or on complaint by any person, any act or omission of anypublic official, employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be

illegal, un0ust, improper, or inefficient.

Section '('), + 66 states-

SEC. 15. o*er#! /unt%on# and ut%e#.

314 In-e#t%)ate and &ro#eute on %t# o*n or on o$&(a%nt by any &er#on! any at oro$%##%on of any &ub(% off%er or e$&(oyee! off%e or a)eny! *hen #uh at oro$%##%on a&&ear# to be %((e)a(! un+u#t! %$&ro&er or %neff%%ent. It ha# &r%$ary

+ur%#d%t%on o-er a#e# o)n%Pab(e by the Sand%)anbayan and! %n the eer%#e of th%#&r%$ary +ur%#d%t%on! %t $ay tae o-er! at any #ta)e! fro$ any %n-e#t%)atory a)eny of

;o-ern$ent! the %n-e#t%)at%on of #uh a#e#.

"urthermore, the calibration of evidence to asses whether apriafacie graft case eDists against private respondents is a Euestion of fact. TheSupreme Court is not a trier of facts, more so in the consideration of theeDtraordinary writ of certiorari where neither Euestions of fact nor law areentertained, but only Euestions of lac4 or eDcess of 0urisdiction or grave abuseof discretion.M''N

"inally, andauswill not lie in the absence of any of the following

grounds- MaN that the court, officer, board, or person against whom the actionis ta4en, unlawfully neglected the performance of an act which the lawspecifically en0oins as a duty resulting from office, trust, or station, or MbN thatsuch court, officer, board or person has unlawfully eDcluded the petitioner fromthe use and en0oyment of a right or office to which he is entitled.M'8NMandauswill lie to compel an officer to perform a ministerial duty but notto compel the performance of a discretionary duty reEuiring the eDercise of

0udgment,M'/Nas in this case.

HEREFORE,the petition is hereby


46/110

CALLEKO! SR.! TIN;A! QQQ andTHE SANDIGANBAYAN (S!"#a$ C,ICONAHARIO!JJ.%o&') D#*#+#on and THE PEOPLE

O% THE PHILIPPINES, ro$u()ated Re#&ondent#. No-e$ber 11! 200

D E C I S I O N

CALLE-O, SR.,J.

Th%# %# a &et%t%on for ert%orar% for the nu((%f%at%on of the /ebruary ! 2002Re#o(ut%on of the Sand%)anbayan 3%-%#%on of /%-e Me$ber#4 F1G#ett%n) a#%de the

-erba( Order of Ku#t%e Nar%#o S. Nar%o! the Cha%r$an of %t# /ourth %-%#%on!

order%n) the d%#$%##a( of Cr%$%na( Ca#e# No#. 25"1125"15D 25"1B25">"D 25"8>

2?01?D and %t# ee$ber 12! 200> Re#o(ut%on deny%n) the $ot%on# for

reon#%derat%on of the &et%t%oner# and the other au#ed %n #a%d a#e#! F2Ga# *e(( a#

the%r &et%t%on for $anda$u# to o$&e( the Sand%)anbayan to d%#$%## the #a%d a#e#.

T)! An!"!d!n+

After the ter$%nat%on of the re'u%#%te &re(%$%nary %n-e#t%)at%on %n OM9

Ca#e# No#. 0""2188 to 2205! the Off%e of the O$bud#$an %##ued a Re#o(ut%on

on Ku(y 2B! 2000 f%nd%n) &robab(e au#e a)a%n#t &et%t%oner# Anton%o ,. Ro$an! Sr.

and Mar%a(en C. Cor&uP! the re#%dent and %ere#%dent of /ILS7N Cor&orat%on!

re#&et%-e(y! and #e-era( other#. On A&r%( 10! 2000! the &et%t%oner#! the

:nder#eretary of /%nane Anton%o . 9e(%ena! and the off%er# of the etron

Cor&orat%on! *ere har)ed *%th -%o(at%on of Set%on >3e4 of Re&ub(% At No.

>01"! %n-o(-%n) the #oa((ed ta red%t #a$@ %n an Infor$at%on doeted a#

Cr%$%na( Ca#e No. 25"22 *h%h read#

The under#%)ned O$bud#$an ro#eutor#! Off%e of the O$bud#$an!hereby au#e ANTONIO . 9ELICENA! :LARICO . AN:TAN! KR.!MONICO . KACO9! CELSO L. LE;ARA! A9:LAHIH /. AL,A77AL!AOLINARIO ;. RE7ES! RE7NALO . CAMOS! RA/AEL S. IAH! KR.!ANTONIO ,. ROMAN! SR.! AN MARIALEN C. COR:H! of -%o(at%on of
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn2


47/110

Set%on >3e4 of Re&ub(% At No. >01"! a# a$ended! other*%#e no*n a# the Ant%;raft and Corru&t rat%e# At! o$$%tted a# fo((o*#

That! dur%n) the &er%od fro$ 1> May 1"" to 0" Kune 1""B!or for #o$et%$e &r%or or #ub#e'uent thereto! %n the C%ty of Man%(a!

Metro Man%(a! h%(%&&%ne#! and *%th%n the +ur%#d%t%on of th%#,onorab(e Court! the afore$ent%oned f%r#t t*o 324 au#ed Anton%o. 9e(%ena and :(dar%o . Andutan! Kr.! both &ub(% off%er#! be%n)then the A##%#tant Seretary=Ad$%n%#trator! and e&uty Eeut%-e%retor! re#&et%-e(y! of the One Sto& Sho& InterA)eny TaCred%t uty ra*ba Center! e&art$ent of /%nane! Man%(a!*h%(e %n the &erfor$ane of the%r off%%a( funt%on# and at%n) *%the-%dent bad fa%th and $an%fe#t &art%a(%ty! on#&%r%n) andonfederat%n) *%th eah other! to)ether *%th au#ed Mon%o .Kaob! Ce(#o L. Le)arda! Abdu(aP%P /. A(hayya(! A&o(%nar%o ;.Reye#! Reyna(do . Ca$&o# and Rafae( S. %aP! Kr.! a(( off%%a(# of

etron Cor&orat%on! and Anton%o ,. Ro$an! Sr. and Mar%a(en C.Cor&uP! both off%er# of /%(#yn Cor&orat%on! d%d then and there!*%((fu((y! un(a*fu((y and (sic)reo$$end and r%$%na((y a&&ro-ethe tran#fer of the fo((o*%n) Ta Cred%t Cert%f%ate# &ur&orted(y%##ued to /%(#yn Cor&.! to *%t

TCC No. A$ount015" B1>!21>.0001? 1!>""!"12.000205 1!>1>!5B?.00110? 1!128!118.001010 2!2?8!5"".00102" "5?!??2.0010>0 2!2>!51B.0011?5 1!282!215.001180 1!>""!"50.00118" 1!88!>2B.00120 B02!105.001208 5?>!121.00125 5?2!551.001"? 1!82?!>2.001"B 2!5>!521.001"8 B>1!1"?.001"" 18!5>.0015? 1!>1!"12.0015"2 2!00?!"20.001?>> B8!18.001?> 1!21>!080.001??B 1!?"!B"".001B>2 11"!B"5.00


48/110

1B5? 2!??>!B11.001B"8 2!>?!"?.001805 ?02!212.0021?0 2!>B5!"".001"B?2 "8!215.00

1"B?> 2!011!B5>.002205 >!B01!B0>.00221" !B"2!1"0.00225> 1!?1.0022B> 1!081!>".0022B 1!2>B!0B8.002>08 1!805!2"1.002>0" 1!0!8>B.002>>1 1!B!5>B.00220 1!80B!>5.00221 1!>51!>85.00

222

?8B!520.0022> 1!508!B15.0022 501!8">.002>0 1!?0"!B2?.002>? "01!1?.002?> 1!01?!?B>.002?5 >>B!001.00282 1!"?0!"1?.00258> 5">!8B?.00258B 1!588!88>.002?02 1!BB0!?>8.002B2B 1!8B!8">.002B28 1!02!?12.002B55 1!""!"0".002B?2 1!1?>!B8".002B?> 1!85!25.00>11> 1!0B"!BB0.00>1>1 ""!5B8.00>1? 5"!"8?.00>202 >!?""!10>.00>20 1!225!1>5.00>288 08!000.00>28" B!228!5B2.00>2"1 2!8!BB.00>5>0 >B!2B2.00>5" 1!?58!1B2.00>550 ?1>!10.00>1? ?5>!B50.00>?5> >B0!500.00>?B0 805!80.00


49/110

>B08 2!8""!?">.00>"0" 1!8?B!1>".00>"10 1!50"!52".0000" 2!>08!2?.000>5 2!B"0!>>1.00

02 ?!>2?!>1.001B 5!>1B!B81.002"" >!>>?!55".0055B !"8B!21.00 Tota( 1>1!5B!0>.00

fro$ /%(#yn Cor&orat%on! re&re#ented by au#ed Anton%o ,. Ro$an! Sr. andMar%a(en C. Cor&uP! unto and %n fa-or of etron Cor&.! re&re#ented by au#edMon%o . Kaob! Ce#ar L. Le)arda! Abdu(aP%P /. A(hayya(! A&o(%nar%o ;.

Reye#! Reyna(do . Ca$&o# or Rafae( S. %aP! Kr.! *%thout (e)a( ba#%# and&ro&er=re'u%red dou$entat%on! thereby au#%n) undue %n+ury and da$a)e to the)o-ern$ent %n the afore#tated a$ount and at the #a$e t%$e )%-%n) un*arrantedbenef%t! &referene or ad-anta)e to the #a%d &r%-ate f%r$#.CONTRAR7 TO LA6.F>G

A#%de fro$ the afore#tated a#e! #%tyone 3?14 #%$%(ar Infor$at%on# *ere

f%(ed by the Off%e of the O$bud#$an a)a%n#t #o$e f%fty 3504 &ub(% off%%a(# and

&r%-ate %nd%-%dua(# re(at%n) to the %##uane of ta red%t ert%f%ate#.

The au#ed Mon%o . Kaob and Ce(#o Le)arda *ere arra%)ned and

&(eaded not )u%(ty.FG

A# narrated by the &et%t%oner#! the fo((o*%n) e-ent# tran#&%red %n the

Sand%)anbayan/Off%e of the O$bud#$an

.2 Cr%$%na( Ca#e No. 25"22! a(on) *%th other a#e# %n-o(-%n) a((e)ed(yano$a(ou# TCC tran#fer#! na$e(y! Cr%$%na( Ca#e# No#. 25"1125"15! 25"1B25"21! 25"2>25">"! and 25"8>2?01? *ere raff(ed to the /ourth %-%#%on of

the Sandiganbayan..> On 1B A&r%( 2000! &et%t%oner# f%(ed *%th the Off%e of the

O$bud#$an a ery :r)ent Mot%on for Lea-e to /%(e Mot%on for Reon#%derat%onor Re%n-e#t%)at%on@ dated 1? A&r%( 2000! *%th an attahed Mot%on forReon#%derat%on or Re%n-e#t%)at%on 3Re Re#o(ut%on dated 2B Marh 20004@ dated1B A&r%( 2000! throu)h *h%h they #ou)ht re-er#a( of the Off%e of theO$bud#$an# 2B Marh 2000 Re#o(ut%on@ *h%h d%reted the f%(%n) of the
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn4


50/110

Infor$at%on@ %n Cr%$%na( Ca#e No. 25"22. A o&y of &et%t%oner# ery :r)entMot%on for Lea-e to /%(e Mot%on for Reon#%derat%on or Re%n-e#t%)at%on@ dated 1?A&r%( 2000! *%th the%r Mot%on for Reon#%derat%on or Re%n-e#t%)at%on 3ReRe#o(ut%on dated 2B

. Marh 20004@ dated 1B A&r%( 2000 attahed to %t a# %t# Anne 1@! %#

attahed to th%# et%t%on@! and $ade an %nte)ra( &art of %t! a# %t# Anne [email protected] On 28 A&r%( 2000! the /ourth %-%#%on of the Sandiganbayan%##ued

an Order@ )rant%n) &et%t%oner#! a$on) other $o-ant#! (ea-e to f%(e the%rre#&et%-e $ot%on# for re%n-e#t%)at%on or reon#%derat%on! and )a-e thero#eut%on #%ty 3?04 day# to re#o(-e the #a%d $ot%on#.

.? The #%ty 3?04 day dead(%ne )%-en the ro#eut%on to o$&(ete %t#

re%n-e#t%)at%on# and re&ort %t# f%nd%n)# %n re(at%on to #uh re%n-e#t%)at%on# &a##ed*%thout the ro#eut%on re#o(-%n) &et%t%oner# Mot%on for Reon#%derat%on orRe%n-e#t%)at%on 3Re Re#o(ut%on dated 2B Marh 20004@ dated 1B A&r%( 2000.

.B The ro#eut%on# fa%(ure to re#o(-e the $ot%on# for reon#%derat%onf%(ed by &et%t%oner# and the other au#ed %n Cr%$%na( Ca#e# No#. 25"1125">"and 25"8>2?01? dra))ed on %nto the $%dd(e of 2001.

.8 At the hear%n) of Cr%$%na( Ca#e# No#. 25"1125">" and 25"8>

2?01? he(d on 1 Kune 2001! the ro#eut%on *a# #&e%f%a((y *arned by the ourtthat #hou(d %t fa%( to re#o(-e the au#ed# &end%n) $ot%on# for reon#%derat%on! %t*a# &o##%b(e that Cr%$%na( Ca#e# No#. 25"1125">" and 25"8>2?01? *ou(d bed%#$%##ed.

." The ourt# *arn%n) not*%th#tand%n)! the ro#eut%on! %n aMan%fe#tat%on@ dated 21 Kune 2001! a)a%n #ou)ht ane((at%on of the arra%)n$entand &retr%a( onferene %n Cr%$%na( Ca#e# No#. 25"1125">" and 25"8>2?01?#et on 2 Ku(y 2001! but the ourt den%ed that re'ue#t %n a Re#o(ut%on@ dated 2?Kune 2001! %n *h%h the ourt a)a%n re$%nded the ro#eut%on that Cr%$%na( Ca#e#No#. 25"1125">" and 25"8>2?01? had been &end%n) for $ore than a year andthat further de(ay au#ed by %t *ou(d not be ountenaned.

.10 e#&%te the ourt# *arn%n)! the ro#eut%on #t%(( fa%(ed to re#o(-e the

&end%n) $ot%on# for re%n-e#t%)at%on by the t%$e of the #hedu(ed arra%)n$ent and&retr%a( onferene #et on 2 Ku(y 2001! &ro$&t%n) the ourt to %##ue an order*h%h )a-e the ro#eut%on an add%t%ona( ten 3104 day# to re#o(-e the $ot%on#! andre#et the #hedu(ed arra%)n$ent and &retr%a( onferene to 1B Ku(y 2001.

.11 e#&%te the (ae of the ten 3104 day add%t%ona( &er%od )%-en %t! the

ro#eut%on a)a%n fa%(ed to o$&(ete! and #ub$%t the re#u(t# of! %t# re%n-e#t%)at%on!and %n#tead f%(ed a Man%fe#tat%on@ re'ue#t%n) the ane((at%on and re#ett%n) of thearra%)n$ent and &retr%a( onferene #et on 1B Ku(y 2001.


51/110

.12 In an Order@ dated 1B Ku(y 2001! the ourt d%reted the ro#eut%onto o$&(ete %t# re%n-e#t%)at%on! and #ub$%t the re#u(t# of that re%n-e#t%)at%on to theourt! by 1? Au)u#t 2001! and )ranted the ro#eut%on# re'ue#t for a re#ett%n) byane(%n) the #hedu(ed arra%)n$ent and &retr%a( onferene and #ett%n) %t on 20Au)u#t 2001.

.1> On 1? Au)u#t 2001! the ro#eut%on a)a%n fa%(ed to re&orto$&(et%on of the re%n-e#t%)at%on &roe##! but on(y f%(ed an O$n%bu# Mot%on@ %n*h%h %t %nfor$ed the ourt on(y that the &ro#eutor onerned had a(ready $adea reo$$endat%on to the Off%e of the S&e%a( ro#eutor. There be%n) nore#o(ut%on of the &end%n) $ot%on# for re%n-e#t%)at%on yet! the ro#eut%on #ou)htyet another ane((at%on of the #hedu(ed arra%)n$ent and &retr%a( onferene on20 Au)u#t 2001.

.1 The ro#eut%on re&eated %t# re'ue#t for defer$ent of the #hedu(ed

arra%)n$ent and &retr%a( onferene at the #hedu(ed hear%n) on 20 Au)u#t 2001!

but th%# t%$e! the re'ue#t *a# den%ed by Ku#t%e Nar%o! *ho %##ued an ora( orderd%#$%##%n) the a#e on aount of the (on) de(ay a##o%ated *%th the ro#eut%on#re#o(ut%on of the $ot%on# for re%n-e#t%)at%on f%(ed by au#ed.

.15 ,o*e-er! #%ne Ku#t%e Nar%o and the other 324 re)u(ar $e$ber# of

the /ourth %-%#%on of the Sandiganbayanou(d not reah unan%$%ty onu&ho(d%n) Ku#t%e Nar%o# d%#$%##a( of Cr%$%na( Ca#e# No#. 25"1125">" and25"8>2?01?! a S&e%a( /ourth %-%#%on o$&o#ed of f%-e 354 $e$ber# of the,onorab(e Sandiganbayan*a# on#t%tuted &ur#uant to Set%on 13b4 of Ru(e


52/110

.1? On /ebruary 2002! a bare $a+or%ty of re#&ondent ourt!

F5Go-erru(%n) d%##ent# by Ku#t%e Nar%o and Ku#t%e Raou( %tor%no! %##ued %t# f%r#t

'ue#t%oned Re#o(ut%on@ dated /ebruary 2002! the d%#&o#%t%-e &ort%on of *h%h#et a#%de the order of d%#$%##a( %##ued by Ku#t%e Nar%o %n o&en ourt at the

hear%n) of 20 Au)u#t 2001 %n the fo((o*%n) $anner

6,ERE/ORE! the d%#$%##a( of the#e a#e# ora((y ordered%n o&en ourt by the Cha%r$an of the /ourth %-%#%on dur%n) %t#ourt #e##%on he(d on Au)u#t 20! 2001! and re%terated %n h%##ub#e'uentponencia,%# hereby #et a#%de. .@

.1B et%t%oner# f%(ed the%r Mot%on for Reon#%derat%on@ dated 11

/ebruary 2002 fro$ the 'ue#t%oned Re#o(ut%on@ dated /ebruary 2002 on 18/ebruary 2002. A o&y of &et%t%oner# Mot%on for Reon#%derat%on@ dated 11/ebruary 2002 %# attahed to th%# et%t%on@! and $ade an %nte)ra( &art of %t! a# %t#

Anne E.@F?G

Se-era( of the other au#ed a(#o f%(ed #%$%(ar $ot%on# for reon#%derat%on

and=or $ot%on# to 'ua#h=d%#$%## *h%h the &ro#eut%on o&&o#ed.FBG

On ee$ber 12! 200>! the Sand%)anbayan! by unan%$ou# -ote! %##ued a

Re#o(ut%on deny%n) a(( the $ot%on# re#&et%-e(y f%(ed by the au#ed! %n(ud%n) the

&et%t%oner#6,ERE/ORE! for (a of $er%t! the ourt %##ue# an O$n%bu#

Re#o(ut%on denyinga(( the abo-e de#r%bed motions or reconsideration.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn7


53/110

Th%# d%#&o#%t%on render# $oot and aade$% the re#o(ut%on of the ourtdated May ?! 2002 &enned by Ku#t%e Nar%#o S. Nar%o! *h%h deferred at%on onthe Man%fe#tat%on of the &ro#eut%on on#%der%n) that there %# no need for the ourtto at on the #a$e! a# the Man%fe#tat%on *a# f%(ed $ere(y for the ourt#%nfor$at%on on the at%on taen by the Off%e of the S&e%a( ro#eutor on the

-ar%ou# $ot%on# for reon#%derat%on f%(ed by the au#ed %n the#e a#e#.SO ORERE.F8G

On(y the &et%t%oner# f%(ed the%r &et%t%on for ert%orar% and $anda$u# a##a%(%n)

the /ebruary ! 2002 and the ee$ber 12! 200> Re#o(ut%on# of the

Sand%)anbayan! a##ert%n) that the )raft ourt o$$%tted a )ra-e abu#e of %t#

d%#ret%on a$ount%n) to ee## or (a of +ur%#d%t%on %n %##u%n) the #a$e.F"G

In %t# Co$$ent on the &et%t%on! the Off%e of the O$bud#$an! throu)h the

Off%e of the S&e%a( ro#eutor! a-er# that the de(ay %n the #ub$%##%on to theSand%)anbayan of %t# re&ort on %t# re%n-e#t%)at%on *a# au#ed by the &endeny of

the other a#e# of e'ua(! %f not of $ore %$&ortane! not to $ent%on the f%(%n) of

t*entyt*o 3224 other $ot%on# for reon#%derat%on and=or re%n-e#t%)at%on by the

other au#ed %n the #a%d a#e#.F10G It a##ert# that the $ore than oneyear de(ay %# not

a&r%%ou#! $uh (e##! %nto(erab(y a&r%%ou#. It a(#o ontend# that the ora(

d%#$%##a( of the a#e# by Ku#t%e Nar%#o S. Nar%o *a# too dra#t%! a# %t de&r%-ed the

re#&ondent of %t# r%)ht to &ro#eute the a#e# and &ro-e the )u%(t of the &et%t%oner#

beyond rea#onab(e doubt for the r%$e# har)ed.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn10


54/110

T)! R&$#n/ o0 )! Co&'

The &et%t%on %# den%ed due our#e.

/or a &et%t%on for ert%orar% to be )ranted! %t $u#t #et out and de$on#trate!

&(a%n(y and d%#t%nt(y! a(( the fat# e##ent%a( to e#tab(%#h a r%)ht to a *r%t.F11G The

&et%t%oner# $u#t a((e)e %n the%r &et%t%on and e#tab(%#h fat# to #ho* that any other

e%#t%n) re$edy %# not #&eedy or ade'uateF12Gand that 3a4 the *r%t %# d%reted

a)a%n#t a tr%buna(! board or off%er eer%#%n) +ud%%a( or 'ua#% -+ud%%a( funt%on#D

3b4 #uh tr%buna(! board or off%er ha# ated *%thout or %n ee## of +ur%#d%t%on! or

*%th )ra-e abu#e of d%#ret%on a$ount%n) to ee## or (a of +ur%#d%t%onD and! 34

there %# no a&&ea( or any &(a%n! #&eedy and ade'uate re$edy %n the ord%nary our#e

of (a*.F1>G

The &ub(% re#&ondent at# *%thout +ur%#d%t%on %f %t doe# not ha-e the (e)a(

&o*er to deter$%ne the a#eD there %# ee## of +ur%#d%t%on *here the re#&ondent!

be%n) (othed *%th the &o*er to deter$%ne the a#e! o-er#te %t# author%ty a#

deter$%ned by (a*. There %# )ra-e abu#e of d%#ret%on *here the &ub(% re#&ondent

at# %n a a&r%%ou#! *h%$#%a(! arb%trary or de#&ot% $anner %n the eer%#e of %t#

+ud)$ent a# to be #a%d to be e'u%-a(ent to (a of +ur%#d%t%on.F1G Mere abu#e of

d%#ret%on %# not enou)h.

In a &et%t%on for ert%orar%! the +ur%#d%t%on of the ourt %# narro* %n #o&e. It%# (%$%ted to re#o(-%n) on(y error# of +ur%#d%t%on. It %# not to #tray
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/nov2004/162214.htm#_ftn14


55/110

at *%(( and re#o(-e 'ue#t%on# or %##ue# beyond %t# o$&etene #uh a# error# of

+ud)$ent. Error# of +ud)$ent of the tr%a( ourt are to be re#o(-ed by the a&&e((ate

ourt %n the a&&ea( or viaa &et%t%on for re-%e* on ert%orar% %n th%# Court under

Ru(e 5 of the Ru(e# of Court. Cert%orar% *%(( %##ue on(y to orret error# of

+ur%#d%t%on. It %# not a re$edy to orret error# of +ud)$ent.F15G

An error of+ud)$ent %# one %n *h%h the ourt $ay o$$%t %n the eer%#e of %t# +ur%#d%t%on!

and *h%h error %# re-er#%b(e on(y by an a&&ea(. A# (on) a# the ourt at# *%th%n %t#

+ur%#d%t%on! any a((e)ed error# o$$%tted %n the eer%#e of %t# d%#ret%on *%((

a$ount to noth%n) $ore than $ere error# of +ud)$ent! orret%b(e by an a&&ea( or a

&et%t%on for re-%e* under Ru(e 5 of the Ru(e# of Court.F1?G An error of +ur%#d%t%on

%# one *here the at o$&(a%ned of *a# %##ued by the ourt *%thout or %n ee## of

+ur%#d%t%on and *h%h error %# orret%b(e on(y by the etraord%nary *r%t of

ert%orar%.F1BG

;enera((y! the &erfor$ane of an off%%a( at or duty *h%h nee##ar%(y

%n-o(-e# the eer%#e of d%#ret%on or +ud)$ent annot be o$&e((ed by

$anda$u#. ,o*e-er! a *r%t of $anda$u# $ay %##ue *here there %# )ra-e abu#e

of d%#ret%on! $an%fe#t %n+u#t%e! or &a(&ab(e ee## of author%ty.F18G

In th%# a#e! *e f%nd and #o ru(e that the Sand%)anbayan d%d not o$$%t

)ra-e abu#e of d%#ret%on a$ount%n) to ee## or (a of +ur%#d%t%on %n %##u%n) the

a##a%(ed re#o(ut%on#. 6e a(#o he(d that the &et%t%oner# are not ent%t(ed to a *r%t of

$anda$u#.

!he "erbal #rder o $ismissal

%y Justice &ario 's &ullity

In the unan%$ou# Re#o(ut%on of ee$ber 12! 200>! the Sand%)anbayan

ru(ed a# fo((o*#In the a#e# at bar! the d%#$%#

Documents

Art 11-Consti FULL Cases